ReviewIntensive care medicine2025
Clinical heterogeneity and phenotyping of post cardiac arrest brain injury: one size may not fit all.
Review in Intensive care medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Blood-brain barrier-penetrant nanotherapy inhibits haem oxygenase-1-mediated ferroptosis for post-resuscitation neuroprotection.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Why Post-Cardiac Arrest Interventions Often Fail: Therapeutic Amenability and the Rapidly Closing Window of Neuroprotection.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Effectiveness of 33 °C targeted temperature management in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest after resuscitation: a retrospective study.BMC anesthesiology · 2026Article
- Wolf Creek XVIII Part 8: Wolf Creek Innovator in Cardiac Arrest and Resuscitation Science Award.Resuscitation plus · 2026Article
- Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Patients: Different Donor Pathways for an Existing Donor Pool Still Underestimated-Perspective.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Post-cardiac arrest brain injury (PCABI) emanates from the injurious pathophysiologic sequelae that take place during and after resuscitation from cardiac arrest. Regrettably, identification of efficacious management strategies to mitigate PCABI has been disappointing with numerous well-conducted randomized control trials yielding neutral results. The reasons for this observation are likely multifactorial, however, increasingly patient and disease-specific heterogeneity is recognized as a crucial factor in clinical decision-making. Traditionally, PCABI has been stratified based upon simple historical characteristics (e.g. location of cardiac arrest, initial rhythm, witnessed vs. unwitnessed) that inadequately reflect in vivo PCABI severity or responses to clinical interventions within individual patients. It is therefore increasingly clear that this approach to PCABI is insufficient. In other syndromes, such as sepsis or acute respiratory distress syndrome, attempts to identify early "phenotypes" of patients reflect growing recognition of considerable between-patient heterogeneity in the disease mechanisms and response to therapeutic interventions. A similar approach should be taken with PCABI. In this review, we described the clinical heterogeneity and phenotypes of PCABI as related to the underlying pathophysiology, selective anatomical vulnerability and electrographic patterns. The overarching aim of the review is the propose a shift to expeditious phenotyping of PCABI severity that focuses on assessing in vivo severity and patterns of injury that could be used for future targeted therapies. We will also discuss potential causes of heterogeneous clinical responses to interventions and highlight future research areas for PCABI that focus on phenotyping and incorporating these considerations into clinical trials.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.